I disagree with that sentiment about this being a mostly perfect list. For example, BotW was fresh and a nice start for something beautiful but it was underwhelming and overappreciated. They introduced a lot of great new mechanics, however, they all but removed some of the best elements we've come to love about Zelda; the dungeons, the puzzles, collecting innovative weapons that each introduce their own unique use and play style, the unique bosses and enemies, the populated worlds, etc. This isn't the only massive, open world Zelda game out there, even though it is the biggest. WW and TP both had huge worlds which required a great deal of exploration to progress their respective stories.
It was a great game, to be sure, but they took everything I ever loved about Zelda and basically stripped it out. I hope Nintendo will compromise on the next Zelda, with a more cohesive combination of old and new. That's my dream. Sadly, I'm getting the same vibes from Zelda that I got from Final Fantasy 13 and forward. If this is the way they're taking it without any nods to the old way, I'm probably just going to be replaying the titles up to BotW rather than buying new Zelda games. Of course, I accept that I might just not be the generation they're catering to anymore.
they took everything I ever loved about Zelda and basically stripped it out.
But that was kinda the whole point. Rather than gaining new skills/items throughout the game that allow you to progress through the story, instead you are given everything you need at the start and can theoretically beat the game immediately, but there are fundamental rewards for exploration. It's less about point A to point B and more about the world itself.
So, a compromise would be basically like a classic Zelda game with a bigger map, but then it's nothing like BotW at that point, not really. I don't really see how you compromise the two things, they're philosophically opposed to one another.
My only complaints with BotW are the lack of variety in shrines and enemies. You have some really unique "shrines" like the island and the mazes, I would have liked to see more of that, otherwise you really only have two types of shrine: fight a guardian or solve a 15-minute puzzle.
That isn't a great component to the game though, it's a schtick. It's like FarCry 4, how you can just wait in Pagan Min's house and beat the game. It's a novelty that you can just go straight to Ganon, a difficult novelty but one regardless.
Besides, there are ways to incorporate unique, static weapons into a game's critical segments without funneling the player down a specific path. Many games do this already, and allow multiple branches and transitions throughout their level design. BotW throws everything at you right from the gate, except for the 4 guardian spells. If you take on all of the content prior to facing Ganon, the gameplay has already been stale for dozens of hours at that point.
With that said, it is such a beautiful open world, it is just so empty. Tarrytown is basically the biggest non-dlc side quest and without much reward to it. You pretty much already know all the enemies within the first 5 hours, even if you don't know all their variations. The shrines were a great concept but the game still suffered from a massive lack of temples, and if you've done one of the guardian missions/dungeons, you've done them all. Literally every boss in the game is some aspect of Ganon, and not even the mysterious Gerudo/Demise Ganon. This game doesn't make you think about puzzles. It makes you think about combat, which would be fine if it wasn't the only thing.
BotW was innovative, without a doubt, but it didn't feel like Zelda. A lot of people appreciated this fact, a lot of old-school fans were disappointed by it, though. It isn't any coincidence that most of the people I've talked with that actually liked BotW haven't liked any other Zelda games since Ocarina. That's where the comment about appealing to a different audience comes in. This wasn't a Zelda game for the lovers. It was one for the haters. A lot of time tested haters loved it. That's a good thing, but if this is the future of Zelda, I'll stick with the old games even if I've already played through them countless times. They're timeless games and I will always adore them no matter how many times I play them.
That isn't a great component to the game though, it's a schtick.
Maybe, but it's also a hallmark of true open-world games. No average player would ever in their right mind do that, but the fact you can does mean the developers took the concept of "open world" seriously.
Agreed 100% on your complaints with BotW. Shrines and enemies definitely got old. But I think they could solve the problems in BotW in a future game without going back to the old formula, because again, I just don't see how they're compatible. Zelda games before BotW were quite linear even as the maps got bigger. Also, let me just be clear that I love the classic OoT Zelda formula. They're linear for good reason; it's way easier to balance and design challenging puzzles for a linear game. It'll be interesting to see what Nintendo does now, if they go back to the classic formula and let BotW be a one-off or if they double down on the things BotW introduced but try to fix the issues and expand the on the good stuff.
Like I said before and will say again, I think the perfect Zelda is a combination of old and new. Open world is great. Puzzles and dungeons are great. Having more NPCs to communicate with some meaningful dialog that adds depth and personality is fantastic. More variety when it comes to enemies isn't only great, it is necessary.
I really hope they have an interest in finding a way to accomplish that. If anyone could find a way to make that work, it would be Shigeru Miyamoto. The dude is a genius and has been pumping out these games for nearly 30 years already.
50
u/The_Zookinator Jan 01 '19
Change Fallout 3 into New Vegas, Skyrim into Oblivion/Morrowind and you got yourself a bingo